Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7603-D Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -7603-D NAME: PDC Companies and 14910 Cantrell Road Long -form PCD LOCATION: Located North of Cantrell Road and West of Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: PDC Companies 1501 N. University Avenue Little Rock, AR 72207 ENGINEER: The Holloway Firm, Inc. Mr. Bob Holloway 200 Casey Drive Maumelle, AR 72113 AREA: 7.93 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED USE NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 POD and PCD FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF 0-3, General Office District and C-3, General Commercial District PCD 0-3, General Office District and C-3, General Commercial District VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration ordinance to allow advanced grading of the site. BACKGROUND: A request to rezone a portion of this site from R-2, Single-family to POD was filed and withdrawn from consideration prior to the June 3, 2004, Planning Commission Public Hearing. The applicant proposed a development to include office and commercial activities on 3.6 acres located along the western portion of this site. (Z-7603) Ordinance No. 19,314 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 19, 2005, established PDC Company Short -form POD. The request included the development of a 3.6 acre parcel as a Planned Office Development with a restaurant facility on one of FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. the proposed lots and an office building on the second lot. Lot 1 would develop with a restaurant without drive-through service containing 4,500 square feet and Lot 2 would develop with 29,200 square foot of office space. The overall percent for each use on the site was eighty-seven percent office and thirteen percent commercial. The approval established the hours of operation from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. The development has not been constructed. (Z -7603-A) On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow 14910 Cantrell Road and the PDC Company Short -form POD to be rezoned from R-2, Single-family and POD to PCD to allow a four -lot subdivision with a combination of sit-down and drive-through restaurants. The lots varied in size from 1.3 acres to 2.5 acres. Restaurant sizes range from 4,100 square feet to 7,200 square feet. A cul-de-sac would be constructed as a public street from Highway 10 through the middle of the lots to provide public street frontage for each lot. The developer requested the flexibility to shift lot area and restaurant size within the development to accommodate a variety of tenants. A 40 -foot access and utility easement was proposed from the cul-de-sac to a property located to the east of the site. The site was approved as a PCD to allow the construction of a strip retail center with no parking or access located along the rear of the building. According to the applicant access to the site to the east would allow circulation between developments and limit the need for vehicles to access Cantrell Road from the development site. Placement of the access easement would allow vehicles from as far west as Regions Bank to access the existing traffic signal for protected left turns. (Z -7603-B) On February 6, 2007, the Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 19,694 rezoning 14910 Cantrell Road from R-2, Single-family to PCD which allowed the development of 4.2 acres as a two lot development. The site plan indicated two buildings would be constructed on the site. A building containing 7,200 square feet and 107 parking spaces was proposed on the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 6,300 square feet and 110 parking spaces was proposed for the rear lot. A maximum of 13,000 square feet of restaurant space was approved. A selected list of commercial uses was approved for the site other than a restaurant. The hours of operation for a restaurant facility were limited to 10:00 am to midnight seven days per week. The lots were proposed each containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development was proposed through a 24 -foot drive located along the western perimeter of the site and was to be shared with the property approved for PDC Short -form POD located to the west proposed for future development with office and commercial uses. The following uses were approved as allowable uses for the development: Bank or savings and loan, Book and stationary store, Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Eating place without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture store, Hardware or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry, domestic clearing, Office (general and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed). 2 FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. A definition of a "sit down restaurant" was also approved. A "sit down restaurant" is a type of restaurant, which provides tables where one sits down to eat a meal, typically served by wait staff. Historically called simply restaurants, following the rise of fast food restaurants, a retronym for the older "standard" restaurant was created. Most commonly, "sit down restaurant" refers to a casual dining restaurant with table service rather than a fast food service where one orders food at a counter. Sit down restaurants are often further categorized as "family style" or "formal'. (Z -7603-C) A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved combining them into a single four (4) lot development for PDC Companies Short -form POD and 14910 Cantrell Road Short -form PCD now titled Cantrell Falls Long -form PCD. The developer is requesting the allowance of a 3,400 square foot drive-through restaurant on Lot 1, a 29,180 square foot office building on Lot 2, including a banking facility with drive-through service, a 6,560 square foot restaurant on Lot 3 and a 4,000 square foot restaurant, a 11,617 square foot retail center and a 2,000 square foot bank on Lot 4. The hours of operation for the development are proposed from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an occupied single-family home on the eastern portion of the property and the homes on the western portion of the property have been removed. To the east of the site is the Wal -Greens development, a strip retail center and Catfish City is located further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a branch bank adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office and medical office are located in the rear of the site on separate lots. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single-family. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS - As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents concerning the proposed development. All residents who could be identified located within 300 -feet of the site, the Westchester/ Heath erbrae, the Secluded Hills, the Westbury and the Pinnacle Valley Neighborhood Associations, the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods and ail owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along Cantrell Road and both sides of the public access easement. 3 FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. 2. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of sixty (60) feet is required and street width of thirty-six (36) feet from back of curb to back of curb. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is required to be obtained for grading of lots without imminent construction. 5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 8. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the intersection complies with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards. 9. In accordance with Section 31-210 (h)(12), access driveways running parallel to the street shall not create a four-way intersection within seventy-five (75) feet of the future curb line of the street. 10. Provide a right turn lane on Cantrell Road into the development with 150 feet stacking space and 100 foot taper. If you have any questions, please contact Traffic Engineering, Bill Henry, at 371-1816. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Entergy: Easements required around the sites perimeter. Contact Entergy for additional information. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension will be required in order to 4 FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. provide service to this property. On-site private fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Little Rock Fire Department for more information. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN- Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use. The applicant has applied for a revised long form PCD to revise the plan layout, add a drive through restaurant and add a drive through bank. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, but the plan does not address this issue. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. This development is located within the Arkansas Highway 10 Overlay District; therefore, must comply with the standards put forth in addition to the landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 3. This project was reviewed as a unitary development. 4. Berming is_ encouraged along Arkansas Highway 10. 5 FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. 5. The AR Highway 10 Overlay requires a twenty-five foot (25') wide landscape strip around the sites entirety; minus adjoining properties of the same ownership. In this instance the minimum amount shall be nine foot (9) on EACH lot or parcel. Currently, this site plan is not meeting this minimum requirement. 6. Interior islands must be a minimum of three hundred (300) square foot in area to qualify towards the minimum landscape ordinance requirements. 7. The area along the northern property line is zoned residential; therefore, a land use buffer of thirty-eight foot (38') is required. Seventy (70%) percent of this area is to remain undisturbed. 8. The property to the north is zoned residential, therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. 9. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 11. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree -covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 29, 2007) Mr. Bob Holloway was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant dimension all building setbacks and areas indicated for landscaping. Staff also stated the site plan as presented did not comply with several of the typical standards of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District but staff stated the site plan was being presented with the same setbacks and landscape strips as the previously approved site plan. Staff noted the landscape strip and building setbacks along the eastern, northern and western perimeters did not meet the typical overlay standard. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation for the site, the order screening board and the location of dumpster facilities. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the private access easement should be constructed to the same standard as a public street. Staff also stated a minimum access easement of 60 -feet with 36 -feet of paving would be required. Staff stated four way intersections were not allowed within 75 -feet of the future curb line of the street. FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan did not comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to landscape strips along the eastern and western perimeters. Staff also stated a minimum of nine feet of landscaping was required along lot lines of common ownership. Mr. Holloway stated the landscape strips were proposed as were previously approved. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing a number of the issues raised at the November 29, 2007, public hearing. The applicant has dimensioned all building setbacks and areas indicated for landscaping and provided the location of the dumpster facilities. A note indicates dumpster facilities will be screened per typical ordinance standard. The hours of operation for the development are proposed from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. The hours of dumpster service have not been indicated. The proposed uses are the same uses as were previously approved and listed as follows: The uses for Lot 1 are indicated as a drive-through restaurant, Lot 2 office space, Lot 3 a restaurant and Lot 4 a Bank or savings and loan, Book and stationary store, Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Eating place without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture store, Hardware or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry, domestic cleaning, Office (general and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed). The maximum building height proposed is 35 -feet. The site plan as presented does not comply with several of the typical standards of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District but are being proposed similar to the previously approved site plans. The landscape strip and building setbacks along the eastern, northern and western perimeters are indicated less than the typical overlay standard. The eastern landscape strip is indicated at 20 -feet. The western landscape strip is indicated at 9 -feet increasing to 26.1 feet adjacent to the rear building located on Lot 2. The northern landscape strip on Lot 2 is indicated at the typically required landscape strip of 25 -feet but the proposed drive-through lane of the bank encroaches into the landscape strip reducing to the typical nine foot minimum. The northern landscape strip on Lot 3 fully complies with the typical minimum ordinance standards of 25 feet. The buildings are proposed with a minimum of 100 -foot building setback along Highway 10 as typically required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The buildings on Lots 3 and 4 fully comply with the typical setbacks for the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to the side yard setback for Lot 4 (30 feet) and the rear yard setback for Lot 3 (40 feet). The building proposed for Lot 2 is not indicated as typically required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The building setback proposed along the western perimeter is 26.1 feet. The overlay typically requires a 30 foot side yard setback. The rear yard setback is indicated at 25 -feet and not the 40 foot setback as typically required. Each of these setbacks was approved as currently proposed on the previously approved site plan. 7 FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. The site plan indicates three locations with drive-through facilities in addition to a drive-through restaurant located on Lot 1. The three locations proposed are two bank locations and one restaurant location with a drive-through pick-up window without an order board. The site plan does not allow stacking as typically required by the ordinance for these three locations. The ordinance typically requires the placement of stacking space for three vehicles for each service window outside the drive isle. The drive through restaurant located on Lot 1 appears to allow adequate stacking for vehicles. The site plan indicates the development of the site with three restaurant facilities, one each located on Lots 1, 3 and 4. The original approval for Lots 1 and 2 allow for development of a 4,500 square foot restaurant and a 29,200 square foot office building. The building proposed for Lot 1 is less than the originally approved square footage. The building is proposed containing 3,400 square feet. Typical parking required for the restaurant located on Lot 1 would be 34 parking spaces. The site plan indicates the placement of 34 parking spaces on Lot 1 to serve the restaurant use. The office building located on Lot 2 would typically require the placement of 73 on-site parking spaces. The site plan as proposed indicates the placement of 90 parking spaces. The previously approved site plan allowed for the construction of a maximum of 13,000 square feet of restaurant space on Lots 3 and 4 and selected commercial uses. The current site plan indicates the construction of a 6,560 square foot restaurant on Lot 3 along with 87 parking spaces. The development of Lot 2 is proposed containing a 6,000 square foot restaurant, a 2,000 square foot bank and 10,500 square feet of retail. The parking proposed for Lot 4 is 96 spaces. Based on the proposed use mix of the site a total of 100 parking spaces would typically be required. The applicant has provided a letter indicating the sight distance at the intersection of the proposed access drive and Cantrell Road is adequate to meet 2004 ASHTO standard. A cross access easement is proposed through out the site to allow connectivity within the development. The access easement, north -south driveway, has been shown as recommended by staff, a 60 -foot easement and 36 -feet of pavement. Signage is proposed consistent with signage allowed per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A single development sign is proposed at the entrance to the development with a maximum height of ten feet and a maximum sign area of 100 square feet. The developer has also indicated a landscaped entrance will be constructed at the entrance to the development. The applicant has indicated the right turn lane will be constructed along Cantrell Road into the development as recommended by staff including 150 feet of stacking space and 100 foot taper. Staff is generally supportive of the application. The proposed uses correspond generally to those previously approved by the Board of Directors for the site. Although, the landscaped areas do not fully comply with the Highway 10, Design Overlay District, they do match the prior approved plans. The hours of operation for Lots 3 and 4 have been modified to correspond to the hours, which were approved by the Board of Directors for Lots 1 and 2 of the development. Staff has concerns with the site plan as proposed related to the stacking for the .11 FILE NO.: Z -7603-D Cont. drive-through facilities. Staff feels the site plan should address all technical issues prior to the Commission acting on the request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 3, 2008) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had addressed staffs concerns related to stacking on the site. Staff stated the pick-up window for the restaurant on Lot 4 had been removed. Staff stated the required stacking for the bank located on Lot 2 had been revised to allow adequate stacking outside the drive isle. Staff the presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Mr. Bob Holloway addressed the Commission on behalf of the owner. He stated it was important to develop the site under a unified development plan and allow grading of the entire site with the initial construction. He stated the development was proposed complying with the previously approved development plans for each of the individual tracts. He stated the developers were complying with the City ordinances and standards for development of the site. Ms. Celia Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was a resident of the Westchester Neighborhood and lived on Canterbury Court. She stated a number of the residents of Westchester had submitted letters of opposition to the development. She stated the concerns were drainage, noise and the increasing of activity on the site. She stated the order board proposed for Lot 1 was not a part of the initial approval. She also stated the development of Lot 4 was more intense than originally expected. She stated with the placement of a drive-through on the site the neighborhood would hear the noise from the restaurant and the boom boxes waiting for service on the site. Ms. Martin stated the hours of operation for the eastern lots were being extended from the original approval. She stated the hours for the restaurants were approved from 10:00 am to midnight and not the 6:00 am as presently proposed. She stated Mr. Hockersmith defined the type restaurant he was proposing for development on the site and the definition did not include a fast-food service restaurant. She stated the neighborhood was opposed to the development for a number of reasons but the primary reason was the intensity of the development with three restaurant site, two bank sites additional commercial and office activities. She stated the traffic the site would generate and activity planned for the site was not within the perimeter of the original approval. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated she was representing the League of Women Voters and the League was opposed the development because of the creep. She stated the original plan indicated commercial at the node and the node had expanded and expanded and with the current site plan A FILE NO.: Z -7603-D (Cont. the site was not a mixed use development but a commercial development with a number of intense commercial activities. She stated the development should step down from commercial to office uses with Y2 the development retail and the other office. She stated the plan as indicated was an intense commercial development with little consideration for office activities. Commissioner Adcock questioned why the application request was before the Commission if the two plans were previously approved and the site was being developed in accordance with the previously approved plans. Staff stated there were differences in the two plans they did not feel they could administratively approve. Staff stated the order board on Lot 1, the drive-through bank on Lot 2 and the building footprint on Lot 4 were in their opinion substantially different than the approved plan. Staff stated the building approved for Lot 4 was a footprint only and it was always known the plan would return to the Commission at the time of development. Staff stated the landscape strips and building setbacks were approved by the Board of Directors and were presently being presented as approved by the Board of Directors. There was a general discussion between the Commission and staff concerning the proposed development and the level of intensity proposed for the site. Staff noted the hours of service for the dumpster facilities had not been indicated by the applicant. Staff also stated the service hours for suppliers had not been indicated. Mr. Holloway stated the applicant was willing to amend the request to limit the hours of service and the dumpster hours to daylight hours. The Commission questioned if there were any remaining technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff stated there were not. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as amended to limit the hours of service of the dumpster and the hours of delivery service to daylight hours. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 4 noes, 1 abstention (Commissioner Nunnley) and 1 absent. 10 March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z -7603-A NAME: PDC Companies HWY 10 Short -form POD LOCATION: North of Cantrell Road approximately 0.1 miles West of Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: PCD Companies HWY #10 1501 North University Avenue, Suite 740 Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 3.58 Acres CURRENT ZONING: ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED ZONING PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 R-2, Single-family Single-family Residential WE FT. NEW STREET: 0 65 percent office 35 percent commercial VARIAN C ESNVAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance — The creation of a lot without public street frontage. BACKGROUND: A request to rezone this site from R-2, Single-family to POD was filed and withdrawn from consideration prior to the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The applicant proposed a development to include office and commercial activities on this 3.58 acre site. The previous request was identical to the application now being considered. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the development of this 3.6 acre parcel as a Planned Office Development, POD to allow the development of the site with a March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-A office/commercial facility and the creation of a two lot plat. There will be a single building on each parcel. Lot 1 will have a drive-through restaurant containing 3000 square feet. Lot 2 will contain 21-, 000 square feet of office space and 8200 square feet of commercial space. The overall percent for each use on the site is sixty-five percent office and thirty-five percent commercial. The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this parcel of property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an occupied single-family home. To the east of the site is also an occupied single-family home with the Wal -Greens development located further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a newly constructed branch bank adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office located in the rear of the site on a separate lot. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single- family. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area- resident concerning -the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be identified located within 300 -feet of the site, the Westbury Neighborhood Association, the Westchester Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association, the Secluded Hills Neighborhood Association and all owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The standard conditions shown on the plans as "Public Works Notes" apply to the project. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project to serve Lot 2. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center -Point Ener : No comment received. K March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) _ _ FILE NO.: Z -7603-A SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required.. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. This- development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code: Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. Coun Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAUDESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office & Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development for office and commercial development. The applicant has previously applied for a POD and a Land Use Plan amendment from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use that was withdrawn without prejudice at the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission hearing. A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (Item #10 — File No. LU04-01-07). Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan. Cantrell Road is built as a five -lane road through this area. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Cantrell Road may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. Since this property is located on a Principal Arterial access to the site should be minimized and should not impede through traffic. 3 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7503-A Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting. the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance. This action could result in the removal of trees in order t6 accommodate the development of uses possible in the Commercial land use category. Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. A six foot high screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required where adjacent to residentially zoned properties to the north. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a POD to allow the ' development of an office/commercial development. Staff stated the percentages requested were consistent with those allowed for a Planned Office Development. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested Mr. White provide details concerning the proposed uses of the development. Staff also requested the total building coverage be provided in the general notes section of the site plan. Staff stated the proposed building on Lot 1 was indicated at 80 -feet and the typical required setback on Highway 10 was 100 -feet. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the conditions noted in the general notes section would apply to the proposed development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the areas set aside for buffers appeared to meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff also noted screening would be required to the north where adjacent to single-family zoned properties. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. 4 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 H. ANALYSIS: FILE NO.: Z -7603-A The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee Meeting. The applicant has indicated the dumpster location for proposed Lot 2 on the site plan and included a note concerning screening. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed as required by the zoning ordinance or at a minimum on three sides at least two feet above the finished grade of the container. The applicant is requesting the creation of a two lot plat through the planned development process. The requested subdivision will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. The proposed lot will be served by a sixty foot access and utility easement through Lot 1. The applicant has indicated a development sign will be located near the front drive. The applicant has indicated the sign will be a ground mounted monument style no more than ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. The proposed signage is consistent with signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has also indicated a tenant ground mounted sign, maximum allowed by ordinance, near the western property line. Staff is not supportive of the requested signage. Staff feels the placement of two signs on this single development is not consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has indicated Lot 1 will develop with a restaurant and Lot 2 will develop with an office/commercial development. The applicant has indicated the proposed uses for Lot 2 are those listed in the 0-3, General Office Zoning District along with the ' Conditional Uses and the Accessory Uses with no limit on the percentages allowed. Typically, an 0-3 development is allowed ten percent of the gross square footage to develop with the listed accessory uses. The listed Conditional Uses requires approval from the Commission. The site plan includes the total building coverage for each lot. The total building coverage for proposed Lot 1 is 5.69 percent and for proposed Lot 2 is 28.3 percent. The applicant has indicated the development of Lot 1 as a restaurant with 3,000 square feet of building space and 50 parking spaces. The total lot area contains 1.21 acres. The proposed lot area is more than adequate to meet the minimum required lot size for a commercially zoned site but not in compliance with minimum lot sizes typically required under the Highway 10 Design Overlay District or 2 acre minimum lot sizes. The proposed parking is also adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand for a restaurant. The typical minimum parking required for a restaurant would be 30 parking spaces. 5 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE. NO.: Z -7603-A The applicant has indicated an office development on -Lot 2 consisting of 21,000 square feet of office space and 8,200 square feet of commercial space. The applicant has indicated 116 parking spaces to serve Lot 2. The typical minimum parking required for the site would be 93 parking spaces based on one space per 225 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed parking is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum demand. The applicant has indicated a reduced building line adjacent to Cantrell Road and a reduced landscape buffer along Cantrell Road. The applicant has indicated an 80 -foot building setback (100 -foot typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District) and a 35 -foot landscape buffer (typically 40 -feet by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District). Staff is not supportive of the reduced request. Other sites, which have redeveloped in the area have typically maintained the integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff feels the developer is requesting to overbuild the site and the proposed site plan does not maintain the integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to landscaping and front building line placement. The applicant has requested a Planned .Office Development to develop the site with the indicated uses. The percentage of office and commercial use is consistent with percentages allowed in the Zoning Ordinance for a Planned Office Development. Staff does not feel however, the proposed development is appropriate to the site. With the placement of a restaurant on the lot abutting Cantrell Road and the office building located to the rear of the site the overall development will be commercial in character and is not consistent with the City's Future Land Use Plan. A Land Use Plan for this site has been filed on this Agenda as a separate item (Item # 10 — File No. LU04-01-07). Staff feels the proposed request is inconsistent with the adopted plan and feels the change to the plan is inappropriate. With the development of this site as a "commercial development" staff feels this will expand the previously identified commercial node at Taylor Loop thus "stripping out Cantrell Road". Since the zoning request is inconsistent with the City's Land Use Plan and the development will have a commercial character, staff is not supportive of the request. 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. - There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter requesting the item be deferred to the January 20, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated the request would require a waiver of the By-laws for the late deferral request. A motion was made to D March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-A waive the By-laws for the later deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 20, 2005) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated January 13, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the March 3, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 no and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Staff stated the applicant had amended his request to limit the commercial aspect of the development to thirteen percent of the total building square footage. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a two lot plat as a part of the development. Staff stated the site plan indicated a restaurant on proposed Lot 1 and an office building on proposed Lots 2. Staff stated the applicant had removed his request for commercial uses in the building on proposed Lot 2. Staff stated the request included 0-3, General Office District uses only. Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the site was located near the intersection of two arterials. He stated at the intersection there was a commercial node containing a Wal -Greens, Catfish City and a site approved for a strip retail center. He stated there was one property between his client's property and the commercial activities current occupied as a residence. He stated at the time of redevelopment of this remaining site it was unlikely the remaining piece would be redeveloped as an office use. He presented a map showing the area around the site and the current development pattern. He stated the uses in the area were commercial at the intersection of the two arterials, stepping down to office uses to the west of the proposed site. He stated he felt the request for the current application was in compliance with the City's adopted Land Use Plan by 7 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -7603 -A allowing a step down in intensity of uses. He stated the proposal included the development of a predominately office development with a small portion of the development being allowed commercial activity. Doctor McGrew addressed the Commission with questions. He stated he did not wish to leave his current home and if the development were approved he would request proper buffers and screening to protect his residence. He stated he would request an eight foot privacy fence along the adjoining property line to shield his home for the non- residential activity. Mr. Nathan Culp addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he was President of the Westbury Neighborhood Association and his neighborhood was opposed to the rezoning of the site to allow commercial activity. He stated he felt the rezoning was a violation of the City's current ordinances. He stated he felt the proposed development would have an adverse impact on adjoining properties by the expansion of the existing commercial node. He stated he also felt a C-3 use in Transitional would only increase traffic in the area taxing the existing street network. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated she was representing 'the League of Women's Voters of Pulaski County and the League was opposed to the request. She stated only two years ago the Land Use Plan was amended from Transition to Suburban Office to allow for redevelopment of the site. She stated she did not feel commercial was appropriate for the site. Mr. Joe White stated the applicant was willing to amend his application to place an eight foot fence along the adjoining property line with Dr. McGrew. He stated he did not feel the placement of the indicated restaurant would be any more intense than an office development on the site during am and pm peak hours. He stated the applicant was not requesting the placement of a menu order board on the site. He stated the proposal did include a drive -up window to allow call ahead orders to be retrieved from the individual's car. There was a general discussion concerning the current traffic counts in the area and if staff felt the development would generate traffic counts similar to an office development. Staff stated the current traffic count adjacent to the site was roughly 20,000 vehicles per day. Staff stated the street was nearing design capacity. Staff also stated the development would generate additional traffic in the area but they felt the traffic counts would be similar to an office development on the site. Staff reminder the Commission that they reviewed an amendment package for the Future Land Use Plan at their previous meeting and no change for the site was recommended. Staff stated the goal had been not to create a linear commercial pattern along Cantrell Road. E:3 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B_1 (Cont.) _ FILE NO.: Z -7603-A There was a general discussion concerning the appropriateness of the use for the site. Commissioner Rector stated he felt the development did allow for the stepping down of intensity of uses from the intersection of Taylor Loop Road and Cantrell Road to the creek located to the West. A motion was made to approve the rezoning request to allow the placement of a restaurant facility without a menu board and only a drive -up pickup window on proposed Lot 1 and an office development containing 0-3, General Office District uses on proposed Lot 2 and the amendment to place an eight foot wood fence along the property line adjoining Dr. McGrew's property. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 4 noes and 1 absent. N March 27, 2008 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z -7603-D NAME: PDC Companies and 14910 Cantrell Road Long -form PCD LOCATION: Located North of Cantrell Road and West of Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: PDC Companies 1501 N. University Avenue Little Rock, AR 72207 ENGINEER: The Holloway Firm, Inc. Mr. Bob Holloway 200 Casey Drive Maumelle, AR 72113 AREA: 7.93 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: POD and PCD ALLOWED USES: 0-3, General Office District and C-3, General Commercial District PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: 0-3, General Office District and C-3, General Commercial District VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration ordinance to allow advanced grading of the site. BACKGROUND: A request to rezone a portion of this site from R-2, Single-family to POD was filed and withdrawn from consideration prior to the June 3, 2004, Planning Commission Public Hearing. The applicant proposed a development to include office and commercial activities on 3.6 acres located along the western portion of this site. (Z-7603) March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -7603-D Ordinance No. 19,314 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 19, 2005, established PDC Company Short -form POD. The request included the development of a 3.6 acre parcel as a Planned Office Development with a restaurant facility on one of the proposed lots and an office building on the second lot. Lot 1 would develop with a restaurant without drive-through service containing 4,500 square feet and Lot 2 would develop with 29,200 square foot of office space. The overall percent for each use on the site was eighty-seven percent office and thirteen percent commercial. The approval established the hours of operation from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. The development has not been constructed. (Z -7603-A) On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow 14910 Cantrell Road and the PDC Company Short -form POD to be rezoned from R-2, Single-family and POD to PCD to allow a four -lot subdivision with a combination of sit-down and drive-through restaurants. The lots varied in size from 1.3 acres to 2.5 acres. Restaurant sizes range from 4,100 square feet to 7,200 square feet. A cul-de-sac would be constructed as a public street from Highway 10 through the middle of the lots to provide public street frontage for each lot. The developer requested the flexibility to shift lot area and restaurant size within the development to accommodate a variety of tenants. A 40 -foot access and utility easement was proposed from the cul-de-sac to a property located to the east of the site. The site was approved as a PCD to allow the construction of a strip retail center with no parking or access located along the rear of the building. According to the applicant access to the site to the east would allow circulation between developments and limit the need for vehicles to access Cantrell Road from the development site. Placement of the access easement would allow vehicles from as far west as Regions Bank to access the existing traffic signal for protected left turns. (Z -7603-B) On February 6, 2007, the Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 19,694 rezoning 14910 Cantrell Road from R-2, Single-family to PCD which allowed the development of 4.2 acres as a two lot development. The site plan indicated two buildings would be constructed on the site. A building containing 7,200 square feet and 107 parking spaces was proposed on the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 6,300 square feet and 110 parking spaces was proposed for the rear lot. A maximum of 13,000 square feet of restaurant space was approved. A selected list of commercial uses was approved for the site other than a restaurant. The hours of operation for a restaurant facility were limited to 10:00 am to midnight seven days per week. The lots were proposed each containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development was proposed through a 24 -foot drive located along the western perimeter of the site and was to be shared with the property approved for PDC Short -form POD located to the west proposed for future development with office and commercial uses. 2 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.)_ FILE NO.: Z -7603-D The following uses were approved as allowable uses for the development: Bank or savings and loan, Book and stationary store, Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Eating place without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture store, Hardware or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry, domestic cleaning, Office (general and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed). A definition of a "sit down restaurant" was also approved. A "sit down restaurant" is a type of restaurant, which provides tables where one sits down to eat a meal, typically served by wait staff. Historically called simply restaurants, following the rise of fast food restaurants, a retronym for the older "standard" restaurant was created. Most commonly, "sit down restaurant" refers to a casual dining restaurant with table service rather than a fast food service where one orders food at a counter. Sit down restaurants are often further categorized as "family style" or "formal'. (Z -7603-C) A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved combining them into a single four (4) lot development for PDC Companies Short -form POD and 14910 Cantrell Road Short -form PCD now titled Cantrell Falls Long -form PCD. The developer is requesting the allowance of a 3,400 square foot drive-through restaurant on Lot 1, a 29,180 square foot office building on Lot 2, including a banking facility with drive-through service, a 6,560 square foot restaurant on Lot 3 and a 4,000 square foot restaurant, a 11,617 square foot retail center and a 2,000 square foot bank on Lot 4. The hours of operation for the development are proposed from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an occupied single-family home on the eastern portion of the property and the homes on the western portion of the property have been removed. To the east of the site is the Wal -Greens development, a strip retail center and Catfish City is located further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a branch bank adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office and medical office are located in the rear of the site on separate lots. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single-family. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents concerning the proposed development. All residents who could be identified located within 300 -feet of the site, the Westchester/Heatherbrae, the Secluded Hills, the Westbury and the Pinnacle Valley Neighborhood Q March 27, 2008 Yft: 9]UAF-1I P1 ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7603-D Associations, the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods and all owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along Cantrell Road and both sides of the public access easement. 2. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of sixty (60) feet is required and street width of thirty-six (36) feet from back of curb to back of curb. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is required to be obtained for grading of lots without imminent construction. 5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 8. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the intersection complies with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards. 9. In accordance with Section 31-210 (h)(12), access driveways running parallel to the street shall not create a four-way intersection within seventy-five (75) feet of the future curb line of the street. 10. Provide a right turn lane on Cantrell Road into the development with 150 feet stacking space and 100 foot taper. If you have any questions, please contact Traffic Engineering, Bill Henry, at 371-1816. a] March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-D E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Entergy: Easements required around the sites perimeter. Contact Entergy for additional information. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. On-site private fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Little Rock Fire Department for more information. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use. The applicant has applied for a revised long form PCD to revise the plan layout, add a drive through restaurant and add a drive through bank. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on 5 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -7603-D Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, but the plan does not address this issue. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. This development is located within the Arkansas Highway 10 Overlay District; therefore, must comply with the standards put forth in addition to the landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 3. This project was reviewed as a unitary development. 4. Berming is encouraged along Arkansas Highway 10. 5. The AR Highway 10 Overlay requires a twenty-five foot (25') wide landscape strip around the sites entirety; minus adjoining properties of the same ownership. In this instance the minimum amount shall be nine foot (9') on EACH lot or parcel. Currently, this site plan is not meeting this minimum requirement. 6. Interior islands must be a minimum of three hundred (300) square foot in area to qualify towards the minimum landscape ordinance requirements. 7. The area along the northern property line is zoned residential; therefore, a land use buffer of thirty-eight foot (38') is required. Seventy (70%) percent of this area is to remain undisturbed. 8. The property to the north is zoned residential, therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. 9. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 11. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree -covered site. Credit toward fulfilling 9 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-D Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 29, 2007) Mr. Bob Holloway was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant dimension all building setbacks and areas indicated for landscaping. Staff also stated the site plan as presented did not comply with several of the typical standards of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District but staff stated the site plan was being presented with the same setbacks and landscape strips as the previously approved site plan. Staff noted the landscape strip and building setbacks along the eastern, northern and western perimeters did not meet the typical overlay standard. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation for the site, the order screening board and the location of dumpster facilities. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the private access easement should be constructed to the same standard as a public street. Staff also stated a minimum access easement of 60 -feet with 36 -feet of paving would be required. Staff stated four way intersections were not allowed within 75 -feet of the future curb line of the street. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan did not comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to landscape strips along the eastern and western perimeters. Staff also stated a minimum of nine feet of landscaping was required along lot lines of common ownership. Mr. Holloway stated the landscape strips were proposed as were previously approved. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing a number of the issues raised at the November 29, 2007, public hearing. The applicant has dimensioned all building setbacks and areas indicated for landscaping and provided the location of the dumpster facilities. A note indicates dumpster facilities will be screened per typical ordinance standard. The hours of operation 7 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION I11121Ji1111016MA [ene III FILE NO.: Z -7603-D for the development are proposed from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. The hours of dumpster service have not been indicated. The proposed uses are the same uses as were previously approved and listed as follows: The uses for Lot 1 are indicated as a drive-through restaurant, Lot 2 office space, Lot 3 a restaurant and Lot 4 a Bank or savings and loan, Book and stationary store, Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Eating place without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture store, Hardware or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry, domestic cleaning, Office (general and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed). The maximum building height proposed is 35 -feet. The site plan as presented does not comply with several of the typical standards of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District but are being proposed similar to the previously approved site plans. The landscape strip and building setbacks along the eastern, northern and western perimeters are indicated less than the typical overlay standard. The eastern landscape strip is indicated at 20 -feet. The western landscape strip is indicated at 9 -feet increasing to 26.1 feet adjacent to the rear building located on Lot 2. The northern landscape strip on Lot 2 is indicated at the typically required landscape strip of 25 -feet but the proposed drive-through lane of the bank encroaches into the landscape strip reducing to the typical nine foot minimum. The northern landscape strip on Lot 3 fully complies with the typical minimum ordinance standards of 25 feet. The buildings are proposed with a minimum of 100 -foot building setback along Highway 10 as typically required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The buildings on Lots 3 and 4 fully comply with the typical setbacks for the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to the side yard setback for Lot 4 (30 feet) and the rear yard setback for Lot 3 (40 feet). The building proposed for Lot 2 is not indicated as typically requited per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The building setback proposed along the western perimeter is 26.1 feet. The overlay typically requires a 30 foot side yard setback. The rear yard setback is indicated at 25 -feet and not the 40 foot setback as typically required. Each of these setbacks was approved as currently proposed on the previously approved site plan. The site plan indicates three locations with drive-through facilities in addition to a drive-through restaurant located on Lot 1. The three locations proposed are two bank locations and one restaurant location with a drive-through pick-up window without an order board. The site plan does not allow stacking as typically required by the ordinance for these three locations. The ordinance typically requires the placement of stacking space for three vehicles for each service window outside the drive isle. The drive through restaurant located on Lot 1 appears to allow adequate stacking for vehicles. The site plan indicates the development of the site with three restaurant facilities, one each located on Lots 1, 3 and 4. The original approval for Lots 1 and 2 allow for development of a 4,500 square foot restaurant and a 29,200 square foot office building. The building proposed for Lot 1 is less than the originally 0 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-D approved square footage. The building is proposed containing 3,400 square feet. Typical parking required for the restaurant located on Lot 1 would be 34 parking spaces. The site plan indicates the placement of 34 parking spaces on Lot 1 to serve the restaurant use. The office building located on Lot 2 would typically require the placement of 73 on-site parking spaces. The site plan as proposed indicates the placement of 90 parking spaces. The previously approved site plan allowed for the construction of a maximum of 13,000 square feet of restaurant space on Lots 3 and 4 and selected commercial uses. The current site plan indicates the construction of a 6,560 square foot restaurant on Lot 3 along with 87 parking spaces. The development of Lot 2 is proposed containing a 6,000 square foot restaurant, a 2,000 square foot bank and 10,500 square feet of retail. The parking proposed for Lot 4 is 96 spaces. Based on the proposed use mix of the site a total of 100 parking spaces would typically be required. The applicant has provided a letter indicating the sight distance at the intersection of the proposed access drive and Cantrell Road is adequate to meet 2004 ASHTO standard. A cross access easement is proposed through out the site to allow connectivity within the development. The access easement, north -south driveway, has been shown as recommended by staff, a 60 -foot easement and 36 -feet of pavement. Signage is proposed consistent with signage allowed per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A single development sign is proposed at the entrance to the development with a maximum height of ten feet and a maximum sign area of 100 square feet. The developer has also indicated a landscaped entrance will be constructed at the entrance to the development. The applicant has indicated the right turn lane will be constructed along Cantrell Road into the development as recommended by staff including 150 feet of stacking space and 100 foot taper. Staff is generally supportive of the application. The proposed uses correspond generally to those previously approved by the Board of Directors for the site. Although, the landscaped areas do not fully comply with the Highway 10, Design Overlay District, they do match the prior approved plans. The hours of operation for Lots 3 and 4 have been modified to correspond to the hours, which were approved by the Board of Directors for Lots 1 and 2 of the development. Staff has concerns with the site plan as proposed related to the stacking for the drive-through facilities. Staff feels the site plan should address all technical issues prior to the Commission acting on the request. AFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. 9 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cort.) FILE NO.: Z -7603-D PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 3, 2008) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had addressed staff's concerns related to stacking on the site. Staff stated the pick-up window for the restaurant on Lot 4 had been removed. Staff stated the required stacking for the bank located on Lot 2 had been revised to allow adequate stacking outside the drive isle. Staff the presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Mr. Bob Holloway addressed the Commission on behalf of the owner. He stated it was important to develop the site under a unified development plan and allow grading of the entire site with the initial construction. He stated the development was proposed complying with the previously approved development plans for each of the individual tracts. He stated the developers were complying with the City ordinances and standards for development of the site. Ms. Celia Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was a resident of the Westchester Neighborhood and lived on Canterbury Court. She stated a number of the residents of Westchester had submitted letters of opposition to the development. She stated the concerns were drainage, noise and the increasing of activity on the site. She stated the order board proposed for Lot 1 was not a part of the initial approval. She also stated the development of Lot 4 was more intense than originally expected. She stated with the placement of a drive-through on the site the neighborhood would hear the noise from the restaurant and the boom boxes waiting for service on the site. Ms. Martin stated the hours of operation for the eastern lots were being extended from the original approval. She stated the hours for the restaurants were approved from 10:00 am to midnight and not the 6:00 am as presently proposed. She stated Mr. Hockersmith defined the type restaurant he was proposing for development on the site and the definition did not include a fast-food service restaurant. She stated the neighborhood was opposed to the development for a number of reasons but the primary reason was the intensity of the development with three restaurant site, two bank sites additional commercial and office activities. She stated the traffic the site would generate and activity planned for the site was not within the perimeter of the original approval. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated she was representing the League of Women Voters and the League was opposed the development because of the creep. She stated the original plan indicated commercial at the node and the node had expanded and expanded and with the current site plan the site was not a mixed use development but a commercial development with a 10 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7603-D number of intense commercial activities. She stated the development should step down from commercial to office uses with Y2 the development retail and the other office. She stated the plan as indicated was an intense commercial development with little consideration for office activities. Commissioner Adcock questioned why the application request was before the Commission if the two plans were previously approved and the site was being developed in accordance with the previously approved plans. Staff stated there were differences in the two plans they did not feel they could administratively approve. Staff stated the order board on Lot 1, the drive-through bank on Lot 2 and the building footprint on Lot 4 were in their opinion substantially different than the approved plan. Staff stated the building approved for Lot 4 was a footprint only and it was always known the plan would return to the Commission at the time of development. Staff stated the landscape strips and building setbacks were approved by the Board of Directors and were presently being presented as approved by the Board of Directors. There was a general discussion between the Commission and staff concerning the proposed development and the level of intensity proposed for the site. Staff noted the hours of service for the dumpster facilities had not been indicated by the applicant. Staff also stated the service hours for suppliers had not been indicated. Mr. Holloway stated the applicant was willing to amend the request to limit the hours of service and the dumpster hours to daylight hours. The Commission questioned if there were any remaining technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff stated there were not. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as amended to limit the hours of service of the dumpster and the hours of delivery service to daylight hours. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 4 noes, 1 abstention (Commissioner Nunnley) and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The Commission on January 3, 2008, heard this item. There were two components of the request including a revision to previously approved Planned Developments and a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of the entire 7.93 acre site with the construction of the first building. The Commission only took one vote which resulted in a denial of the request by a vote of 5 ayes, 4 noes, 1 abstention (Commissioner Nunnley) and 1 absent. Only one vote was taken by the Commission on the request. The recommendation was appealed to the Board of Directors and was scheduled to be heard on March 4, 2008. The item was deferred at the Board of Directors meeting to allow the item to be returned to the Commission for the specific purpose of a vote on the 11 March 27, 2008 SUBDIVISION FILE NO.: Z -7603-D variance request to the Land Alteration Ordinance. Staff is supportive of the variance request. The above write-up indicates staff initially had concerns with the proposed development, most were related to site design issues. The applicant addressed staff's concerns related to the design and staff presented a positive recommendation of the item at the January 3, 2008, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the variance request. The development is proposed with a unified development plan which would allow for the construction of access and drives during the first phase of the development. The applicant has also indicated a desire to balance the site and eliminate the need to haul off and haul onto the site once developments are secured for each of the individual lots. According to the applicant the area disturbed but not developed with buildings immediately will be seeded and stabilized as set forth in the Land Alteration Ordinance. Once again the only item before the Commission is a vote on the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance. Staff is supportive of the variance request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 27, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the variance request to the Land Alteration Ordinance. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 12 October 26, 2006 ITEM NO.: I FILE NO.: Z -7603-C NAME: 14910 Cantrell Road Short -form PCD LOCATION: Located at 14910 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Steve Hockersmith 14910 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 4.2 acres CURRENT ZONING: ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 R-2, Single-family Single-family residential PCD Restaurant Development FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to rezone this site along with additional area located to the west of this site from POD and R-2 to PCD. The proposal was to allow a four lot subdivision with a combination of sit-down and drive-thru restaurants. The lots varied in size from 1.3 acres to 2.5 acres. The restaurants ranged from 4,100 square feet to 7,200 square feet. A cul-de-sac was to be constructed as a public street from Highway 10 through the middle of the lots to provide public street frontage for each lot. The developer requested the flexibility to shift lot area and restaurant size within the development to accommodate a variety of tenants. October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7603-C A 40 -foot access and utility easement was proposed from the cul-de-sac to a property located to the east of the site. This site was approved as a PCD to allow the construction of a strip retail center with no parking or access located along the rear of the building. According to the applicant access to the site to the east would allow circulation between developments and limit the need for vehicles to access Cantrell Road from the site. A. PROPOSAL: The original application submission included an area containing 7.39 acres and four lots. This application request has since been amended removing the western portion of the development and two of the proposed lots. The current rezoning request includes the development of 4.2 acres with two lots. The applicant is requesting a rezoning from R-2 to PCD to allow the property to be developed utilizing C-3 uses as allowable uses for the site. The applicant has excluded the following listed uses as allowable uses: Beverage shop, College dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, College, university or seminary, Convenience store with gas pumps, Convent or monastery, Day nursery or day care center, Day care center, adult, Establishment for the care of alcoholic, narcotic or psychiatric patients, Group care facility, Hospital, Hotel or motel, Laundromat or pick-up station, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi -family dwellings, Parking commercial lot or garage, Pawnshop, Private club with dining or bar service, School (business), School (commercial, trade or craft), School (public or denominational), Service station. The site plan indicates two buildings will be constructed on the site. A building containing 11,000 square feet and 107 parking spaces are proposed on the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 9,900 square feet and 110 parking spaces are proposed for the rear lot. The lots are proposed each containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development is proposed through a 24 -foot existing drive located along the western perimeter of this site and is to be shared with the property located to the west proposed for future development of office and commercial uses. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an occupied single-family home. To the west of the site is property zoned POD to allow the future development of an office/commercial development which is the area of the original application request. The homes have been removed. To the east of the site is the Wal -Greens development and Catfish City is located further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a newly constructed branch bank adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office located in the rear of the site on a separate lot. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single-family. 2 October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Westchester-Heatherbrae and the Westbury Neighborhood Associations, the Pankey Improvement Association, the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association and the Secluded Hills Property Owners Association along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located w4hin 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. Sufficient right-of-way does not exist for the entire frontage of Cantrell Road. 2. A 5 foot sidewalk with appropriate handicap ramps is required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along Cantrell Road and access easements. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is required to be obtained for grading of lots without imminent construction. 5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 8. Submit a letter certified by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Arkansas stating that the driveway location on Highway 10 provides the required sight distance for driver's entering/exiting the facility. Analysis must be done in accordance with the 2004 Edition of the AASHTO Green Book. All proposed landscaping and signage should be considered in certification. The proposed driveway (60 foot access easement and Cantrell Road) maybe re -designed to be right -in -right -out due to inadequate site distance. A triangular island with proper geometry must to 3 October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C be provided to eliminate left turn movements into and out of driveway. 9. In accordance with Section 31-210 (h)(12), access driveways running parallel to the street shall not create a four-way intersection within 75 feet of the future curb line of the street. 10. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of 60 feet is required and street width of 36 feet from back of curb to back of curb. 11. Submit a Traffic Impact Study for the proposed project. Study should address trip generation and trip distribution for the development and also should take into account existing and projected traffic growth. Traffic simulation models should be developed to show that all affected intersections will be capable of handling projected traffic. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannnq Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant 4 October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C has applied for a Short form PCD requesting a rezone of this site from R-2, Single Family to Planned Commercial Development to allow the creation of four lots and the placement of a restaurant facility on each of the lots. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Bicycle Plan: A Class I route is shown on Taylor Loop. A Class I bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. Additional paving and right of way may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal has these objectives relevant to this case: Preserve the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and Promote vigorous enforcement of Landscaping and Excavation Ordinances. These objectives could affect the application thorough proper landscaping and screening. Landscape: 1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. 2. The proposed land use buffer along the northern perimeter abutting residential property is less than the thirty-four (34') feet minimum requirement. Easements cannot count toward fulfilling this requirement. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 3. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. 4. This project is being reviewed as a whole; therefore, all comments will apply for each building permit obtained. 5. Berming is encouraged along Scenic Highway 10. 6. The proposed land use buffer along the northern and eastern perimeter abutting residential property is less than the 25 -feet average width required by the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance. 7. A portion of the proposed parking lot encroaches into the forty (40') feet wide Highway 10 Overlay District requirement. 8. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands. Interior islands must be 9 October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C a minimum of three hundred (300) feet in area to receive credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements. These islands are to be evenly distributed throughout the site. 9. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 11. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 24, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. The Commission questioned why the application request was being considered. Commissioner Yates stated the application was the exact application which was recently denied by the Commission. He stated according to the Commission's By-laws the Commission could not consider the application request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. STAFF UPDATE: (October 5, 2006) This item was presented to the Subdivision Committee by staff at their October 5, 2006, committee meeting. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised plan to staff eliminating the western portion of the proposed development thus creating a substantially different application request. Staff stated they would work with the applicant to address concerns related to the proposed site plan prior to the Commission hearing the request. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has addressed most of staff's concerns related to the proposed site plan which were raised at the October 5, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. As indicated, the site plan has been amended from the original filing creating a substantially different application request. The original application submission included an area containing 7.39 acres and four lots. This application request has since been amended removing the western portion of the development and two of the proposed lots. The current rezoning request includes the development of 4.2 acres with two lots, one lot being developed as a lot without public street frontage. The applicant is requesting the property be developed utilizing C-3 uses as allowable uses for the site. The applicant has excluded the following listed uses as allowable uses: Beverage shop, College dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, College, university or seminary, Convenience store with gas pumps, X October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Convent or monastery, Day nursery or day care center, Day care center, adult, Establishment for the care of alcoholic, narcotic or psychiatric patients, Group care facility, Hospital, Hotel or motel, Laundromat or pick-up station, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Mufti -family dwellings, Parking commercial lot or garage, Pawnshop, Private club with dining or bar service, School (business), School (commercial, trade or craft), School (public or denominational) and Service station. The site plan indicates two buildings will be developed on the site each on an individual lot. A building containing 11,000 square feet and 107 parking spaces are proposed on the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 9,900 square feet and 110 parking spaces are proposed for the rear lot. The lots are proposed each containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development is proposed through a 24 -foot existing drive located along the western perimeter of this site and is to be shared with the adjacent property. The site is located within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The Overlay typically requires a minimum lot development size of two acres. The lots are indicated with 2.01 and 2.33 acres which are adequate to meet this typical minimum ordinance requirement for lot size. The Highway 10 Design Overlay typically requires the placement of a 25 -foot average landscape buffer along the perimeters of the site and a 40 -foot landscape strip along the highway frontage. The proposed site plan indicates the front yard and western landscape strips as typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The landscape strip along the eastern perimeter does not meet the typical minimum ordinance requirement. The indicated parking stalls and drives are in excess of the typical minimum ordinance standards and could be reduced to allow sufficient landscaping to fully comply with minimum ordinance standard. The front building line per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District is typically required at 100 -feet. The side yard building setback is typically required at 30 -feel and the rear yard setback at 40 -feet. The setbacks on the indicated site plan are more than adequate to meet these typical minimum ordinance standards. The site plan indicates the placement of an 11,000 square foot commercial building and 107 parking spaces on one lot. The ordinance would typically require the placement of 36 parking spaces for a commercial business other than a restaurant and 110 parking spaces for a restaurant facility. The second building is proposed with 9,900 square feet and 110 parking spaces. The typical minimum parking required for a commercial business would be 33 parking spaces and a restaurant would typically require the placement of 99 parking spaces. The site plan indicates the placement of a single development sign along the southeastern portion of the proposed drive. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of ten feet and a total sign area of one hundred square feet, consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standards. Building signage is proposed as typically allowed per commercial building signage of the zoning ordinance or a maximum of ten percent of the facade area. 7 October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The site is indicated as Mixed Use on the City's Future Land Use Plan. This classification allows for a mixture of residential, office and commercial uses to occur. Staff feels a mixed use development is more appropriate for the site allowing a transition from the commercial uses Iopated to the east of the site, at a commercial node, to the office uses located to the west. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 26, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Mr. McGetrick stated the original application did include the development of four lots which was revised to only include the development of two lots. He stated the development was limited to C-3 uses with a number of the uses stricken from the listing. He stated the site would allow a transition from the commercial uses to the east and the office uses to the west. He stated the western property was approved for 21,000 square feet of office and 8,000 square feet of commercial space on the rear lot and a restaurant on the front lot. He stated the development would tie to a previously approved access to the western lot so no new curb cuts were proposed for Cantrell Road. He stated he felt the development was less intense than an office use since patrons would be accessing the commercial uses at non -peak traffic hours. He stated he could not commit to the hours of operation since he did not know the specific users of the site. He stated the user could be a commercial business or a restaurant. Mr. McGetrick stated he was willing to amend his application request to increase the landscaping along the eastern perimeter to comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Ms. Celia Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the development was too intense for the area. She stated the previous proposal did not allow for the amount of commercial development being proposed with the current application. She stated the commercial uses should be restricted to the commercial node and not allowed to expand to the west. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the League of Women Voters had lived and died for the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. She stated it was important to allow step down classifications to protect the corridor. She stated the current requested expanded the commercial node which existed at Taylor Loop and Cantrell Roads. She stated Mr. McGetrick indicated commercial was not as intense as office uses but most restaurants had to serve a minimum of two meals per day to be profitable. She stated many served three which did conflict with traffic movements in the area. A October 26, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I Cont, FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Mr. McGetrick stated he felt the zoning did allow a step down in classification with the commercial uses to the east and the office uses to the west. He stated a commercial development was already in place to the west of the site and the proposed development would only compliment the area. He stated the commercial businesses would have different traffic patterns than the peak traffic in the area. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 4 noes and 3 absent. N January 18, 2007 ITEM NO.: L FILE NO.: Z -7603-C NAME: 14910 Cantrell Road Short -form PCD LOCATION: Located at 14910 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Steve Hockersmith 14910 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 4.2 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING: NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 R-2, Single-family Single-family residential PCD PROPOSED USE: Restaurant Development FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to rezone this site along with additional area located to the west of this site from POD and R-2 to PCD. The proposal was to allow a four lot subdivision with a combination of sit-down and drive-thru restaurants. The lots varied in size from 1.3 acres to 2.5 acres. The restaurants ranged from 4,100 square feet to 7,200 square feet. A cul-de-sac was to be constructed as a public street from Highway 10 through the middle of the lots to provide public street frontage for each lot. The developer requested the flexibility to shift lot area and restaurant size within the development to accommodate a variety of tenants. January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7603-C A 40 -foot access and utility easement was proposed from the cul-de-sac to a property located to the east of the site. This site was approved as a PCD to allow the construction of a strip retail center with no parking or access located along the rear of the building. According to the applicant access to the site to the east would allow circulation between developments and limit the need for vehicles to access Cantrell Road from the site. A. PROPOSAL: The original application submission included an area containing 7.39 acres and four lots. This application request has since been amended removing the western portion of the development and two of the proposed lots. The current rezoning request includes the development of 4.2 acres with two lots. The applicant is requesting a rezoning from R-2 to PCD to allow the property to be developed utilizing C-3 uses as allowable uses for the site. The applicant has excluded the following listed uses as allowable uses: Beverage shop, College dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, College, university or seminary, Convenience store with gas pumps, Convent or monastery, Day nursery or day care center, Day care center, adult, Establishment for the care of alcoholic, narcotic or psychiatric patients, Group care facility, Hospital, Hotel or motel, Laundromat or pick-up station, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi -family dwellings, Parking commercial lot or garage, Pawnshop, Private club with dining or bar service, School (business), School (commercial, trade or craft), School (public or denominational), Service station. The site plan indicates two buildings will be constructed on the site. A building containing 11,000 square feet and 107 parking spaces are proposed on the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 9,900 square feet and 110 parking spaces are proposed for the rear lot. The lots are proposed each containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development is proposed through a 24 -foot existing drive located along the western perimeter of this site and is to be shared with the property located to the west proposed for future development of office and commercial uses. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an occupied single-family home. To the west of the site is property zoned POD to allow the future development of an office/commercial development which is the area of the original application request. The homes have been removed. To the east of the site is the Wal -Greens development and Catfish City is located further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a newly constructed branch bank adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office located in the rear of the site on a separate lot. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single-family. 2 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Westchester-Heatherbrae and the Westbury Neighborhood Associations, the Pankey Improvement Association, the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association and the Secluded Hills Property Owners Association along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. Sufficient right-of-way does not exist for the entire frontage of Cantrell Road. 2. A 5 foot sidewalk with appropriate handicap ramps is required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along Cantrell Road and access easements. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is required to be obtained for grading of lots without imminent construction. 5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 8. Submit a letter certified by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Arkansas stating that the driveway location on Highway 10 provides the required sight distance for driver's entering/exiting the facility. Analysis must be done in accordance with the 2004 Edition of the AASHTO Green Book. All proposed landscaping and signage should be considered in certification. The proposed driveway (60 foot access easement and Cantrell Road) maybe re -designed to be right -in -right -out due to inadequate site distance. A triangular island with proper geometry must to 3 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L (Cont. FILE NO.: Z - be provided to eliminate left turn movements into and out of driveway. 9. In accordance with Section 31-210 (h)(12), access driveways running parallel to the street shall not create a four-way intersection within 75 feet of the future curb line of the street. 10. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of 60 feet is required and street width of 36 feet from back of curb to back of curb. 11. Submit a Traffic Impact Study for the proposed project. Study should address trip generation and trip distribution for the development and also should take into account existing and projected traffic growth. Traffic simulation models should be developed to show that all affected intersections will be capable of handling projected traffic. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point EneroV: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant 19 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L (Cont. FILE NO.: Z - has applied for a Short form PCD requesting a rezone of this site from R-2, Single Family to Planned Commercial Development to allow the creation of four lots and the placement of a restaurant facility on each of the lots. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Bicycle Pian: A Class I route is shown on Taylor Loop. A Class I bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. Additional paving and right of way may be required. City Recognized Neiclhborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal has these objectives relevant to this case: Preserve the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and Promote vigorous enforcement of Landscaping and Excavation Ordinances. These objectives could affect the application thorough proper landscaping and screening. Landscape: 1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. 2. The proposed land use buffer along the northern perimeter abutting residential property is less than the thirty-four (34') feet minimum requirement. Easements cannot count toward fulfilling this requirement. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 3. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. 4. This project is being reviewed as a whole; therefore, all comments will apply for each building permit obtained. 5. Berming is encouraged along Scenic Highway 10. 6. The proposed land use buffer along the northern and eastern perimeter abutting residential property is less than the 25 -feet average width required by the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance. 7. A portion of the proposed parking lot encroaches into the forty (40') feet wide Highway 10 Overlay District requirement. 8. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands. Interior islands must be 5 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C a minimum of three hundred (300) feet in area to receive credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements. These islands are to be evenly distributed throughout the site. 9. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 11. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 24, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. The Commission questioned why the application request was being considered. Commissioner Yates stated the application was the exact application which was recently denied by the Commission. He stated according to the Commission's By-laws the Commission could not consider the application request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. STAFF UPDATE: (October 5, 2006) This item was presented to the Subdivision Committee by staff at their October 5, 2006, committee meeting. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised plan to staff eliminating the western portion of the proposed development thus creating a substantially different application request. Staff stated they would work with the applicant to address concerns related to the proposed site plan prior to the Commission hearing the request. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has addressed most of staff's concerns related to the proposed site plan which were raised at the October 5, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. As indicated, the site plan has been amended from the original filing creating a substantially different application request. The original application submission included an area containing 7.39 acres and four lots. This application request has since been amended removing the western portion of the development and two of the proposed lots. The current rezoning request includes the development of 4.2 acres with two lots, one lot being developed as a lot without public street frontage. The applicant is requesting the property be developed utilizing C-3 uses as allowable uses for the site. The applicant has excluded the following listed uses as allowable uses: Beverage shop, College dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, College, university or seminary, Convenience store with gas pumps, 0 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Convent or monastery, Day nursery or day care center, Day care center, adult, Establishment for the care of alcoholic, narcotic or psychiatric patients, Group care facility, Hospital, Hotel or motel, Laundromat or pick-up station, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi -family dwellings, Parking commercial lot or garage, Pawnshop, Private club with dining or bar service, School (business), School (commercial, trade or craft), School (public or denominational) and Service station. The site plan indicates two buildings will be developed on the site each on an individual lot. A building containing 11,000 square feet and 107 parking spaces are proposed on the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 9,340 square feet and 110 parking spaces are proposed for the rear lot. The lots are proposed each containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development is proposed through a 24 -foot existing drive located along the western perimeter of this site and is to be shared with the adjacent property. The site is located within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The Overlay typically requires a minimum lot development size of two acres. The lots are indicated with 2.01 and 2.33 acres which are adequate to meet this typical minimum ordinance requirement for lot size. The Highway 10 Design Overlay typically requires the placement of a 25 -foot average landscape buffer along the perimeters of the site and a 40 -foot landscape strip along the highway frontage. The proposed site plan indicates the front yard and western landscape strips as typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The landscape strip along the eastern perimeter does not meet the typical minimum ordinance requirement. The indicated parking stalls and drives are in excess of the typical minimum ordinance standards and could be reduced to allow sufficient landscaping to fully comply with minimum ordinance standard. The front building line per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District is typically required at 100 -fest. The side yard building setback is typically required at 30 -feet and the rear yard setback at 40 -feet. The setbacks on the indicated site plan are more than adequate to meet these typical minimum ordinance standards. The site plan indicates the placement of an 11,000 square foot commercial building and 107 parking spaces on one lot. The ordinance would typically require the placement of 36 parking spaces for a commercial business other than a restaurant and 110 parking spaces for a restaurant facility. The second building is proposed with 9,900 square feet and 110 parking spaces. The typical minimum parking required for a commercial business would be 33 parking spaces and a restaurant would typically require the placement of 99 parking spaces. The site plan indicates the placement of a single development sign along the southeastern portion of the proposed drive_ The sign is proposed with a maximum height of ten feet and a total sign area of one hundred square feet, consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standards. Building signage is proposed as typically allowed per commercial building signage of the zoning ordinance or a maximum of ten percent of the fagade area. VA January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The site is indicated as Mixed Use on the City's Future Land Use Plan. This classification allows for a mixture of residential, office and commercial uses to occur. Staff feels a mixed use development is more appropriate for the site allowing a transition from the commercial uses located to the east of the site, at a commercial node, to the office uses located to the west. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 26, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Mr. McGetrick stated the original application did include the development of four lots which was revised to only include the development of two lots. He stated the development was limited to C-3 uses with a number of the uses stricken from the listing. He stated the site would allow a transition from the commercial uses to the east and the office uses to the west. He stated the western property was approved for 21,000 square feet of office and 8,000 square feet of commercial space on the rear lot and a restaurant on the front lot. He stated the development would tie to a previously approved access to the western lot so no new curb cuts were proposed for Cantrell Road. He stated he felt the development was less intense than an office use since patrons would be accessing the commercial uses at non -peak traffic hours. He stated he could not commit to the hours of operation since he did not know the specific users of the site. He stated the user could be a commercial business or a restaurant. Mr. McGetrick stated he was willing to amend his application request to increase the landscaping along the eastern perimeter to comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Ms. Celia Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the development was too intense for the area. She stated the previous proposal did not allow for the amount of commercial development being proposed with the current application. She stated the commercial uses should be restricted to the commercial node and not allowed to expand to the west. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the League of Women Voters had lived and died for the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. She stated it was important to allow step down classifications to protect the corridor. She stated the current requested expanded the commercial node which existed at Taylor Loop and Cantrell Roads. She stated Mr. McGetrick indicated commercial was not as intense as office uses but most restaurants had to serve a minimum of two meals per day to be profitable. She stated many served three which did conflict with traffic movements in the area. 0 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Mr. McGetrick stated he felt the zoning did allow a step down in classification with the commercial uses to the east and the office uses to the west. He stated a commercial development was already in place to the west of the site and the proposed development would only compliment the area. He stated the commercial businesses would have different traffic patterns than the peak traffic in the area. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 4 noes and 3 absent. STAFF UPDATE: This item was heard by the Board of Director's on an appeal at their December 18, 2006, public hearing. At the Board of Directors hearing the applicant amended the application request and it was determined by the Board of Directors the item should be returned to the Planning Commission for a vote on the amended application. The following states the amended request as set forth to the Board of Directors in a letter received by staff on December 20, 2006: As per your request, we hereby submit the following amendments to item Z -7603-C to approve a Planned Zoning Development at 14910 Cantrell Road. Any restaurant uses on the 4.5 acre site shall be limited to a maximum total of 13,000 square feet. The restaurants hours of operation shall be designated as 10:00 am until midnight. The restaurants shall be "sit down dining facilities". A "sit down restaurant" is a type of restaurant which provides tables where one sits down to eat a meal, typically served by wait staff. Historically called simply restaurants, following the rise of fast food restaurants, a retronym for the older "standard" restaurant was created. Most commonly, "sit down restaurant" refers to a casual dining restaurant with table service rather that a fast food service where one orders food at a counter. Sit down restaurants are often further categorized as "family style" or "formal". As noted in the minute record above the applicant previously amended the application request to include all perimeter landscaping as typically required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. During the Board of Directors meeting there was discussion concerning an amended site plan to reduce the overall square footage of the proposed buildings. As indicated in the Proposal Section, C-3, General Commercial District uses (with the exception of a few of the allowable C-3 uses) are proposed as potential uses for the site. This includes a number of uses other than a restaurant use. The applicant is continuing to provide staff with additional information. Staff's recommendation is forthcoming. 9 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Mr. Pat McGetrick addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the developers were willing to reduce the total square footage for a restaurant use and limit the hours of operation to non -peak am hours. He stated the development should be viewed with the development located to the west since the two would share a driveway. He stated in this case this did allow for a mixed use development to occur. He stated the development was proposed at the intersection of two five lane roadways. He stated the development as proposed allowed for a transition between the commercial uses to the east and the office uses to the west. Mr. Ernie Peters addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated traffic impacts of a restaurant development during the am peak would be less than an office development. He stated this was due to the applicant limiting the hours of operation to non -am peak hours and retail uses did not generate the traffic demand during the am hours as an office use did since persons would be accessing the site for work if developed as an office use. Ms. Celia Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the Westchester Neighborhood was very concerned with commercial development in the area. She stated with the continued expansion of the commercial node to the west this did not allow a transition. She stated the development was planned with two restaurant pads and the site to the west was also proposed with a restaurant pad. She stated the developer had indicated two potential users were Outback and Red Lobster. She stated these two restaurant franchise were in the top five revenue producing restaurants for the last five years in Little Rock and North Little Rock. She stated to produce this type revenue then the tables had to turn a number of times per day. She stated presently there were six restaurants between Pinnacle Valley and Taylor Loop. She stated the area was not lacking in restaurant space. She requested the Commission adhere to the spirit of the Highway 10 Design Overlay and deny the request. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the development was a commercial development and the only change was decreasing the square footage for a restaurant user and limiting the hours of operation for a restaurant user. She stated traffic was a concern not only in the am hours but during lunch and dinner hours as well. She stated it was not difficult to develop a plan but in the later years it was difficult to hold to the plan. She requested the Commission hold to the previously approved Highway 10 Design Overlay and deny the request. 10 January 18, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: L Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7603-C Mr. Allen Kerr addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was the JP for District 3 and lived in the area. He stated it was important to hold to the plan. He stated area residents bought their homes and area retails established their businesses based on the City's plan. He stated if the City continued to make exceptions in the end the area would not resemble the original plan. Mr. Peters stated the project could be viewed as an in -fill project. He stated the development was limited to one point of access shared with the neighboring property. He stated a restaurant use would have less impact on traffic than an office use. He stated the peak hours were considered home to work and work to home. Mr. Pat McGetrick stated the developers were not trying to expand the commercial node. He stated the developers were trying to use the site as a mixed use development with an office building and commercial uses. He stated the site was next to a commercial center and a potentially 24-hour pharmacy. He stated the development was located at the intersection of two five lane roadway and should be considered as an in -fill development. The Commission questioned why the development was not being considered with the property to the east which would allow this site access to the traffic light at Taylor Loop Road. Staff stated the property to the east was considered as a part of a previous application. Staff stated the eastern development did not lend itself to access through the site since the eastern site was constructed allowing backing of cars into the service or access drive. The Commission questioned staff as to their opposition of the request. Staff stated the development was expanding the commercial node to the west. Staff stated residents in the area feared a stripping of Highway 10. Staff stated with the expansion of the node to the west this opened the door for additional properties to become commercial. Staff stated the developer had indicated he would not come back and amend the property to the west and the only assurance to the Commission was his word. Staff stated he could sell the property and a new owner could request commercial uses. Staff stated they felt it important to maintain the future land use plan and support the area residents and their desire for maintenance of the plan. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 4 noes and 1 absent. 11 M NO.: 13. Z -7603-D NAME: PDC Companies and 14910 Cantrell Road Long -form PCD LOCATION: located North of Cantrell Road and West of Taylor Loop Road Planning Staff Comments: 1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. The notice must be mailed no later than December 19, 2007. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than December 28, 2007. 2. Dimension all building and drive setbacks and areas indicated for landscape. The previous approval allowed the western landscape strip of 9 -feet however the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requires a minimum landscape strip of 25 -feet. The eastern landscape perimeter planting strip was approved at a minimum of 20.06 feet. The DOD requires a minimum landscape strip of 25 -feet along this perimeter as well. 3. The rear landscape strip is indicated at 25.3 feet on the western lot as required by the DOD with the exception of the drive exiting the banking facility. The rear landscape strip along the eastern lot is adequate to meet the typical minimum ordinance standards. 4. The rear building setback on the western lot is located as was previously approved at 25.3 feet. The building located on the eastern lot is located 30 -feet from the rear property line. The previous approval created a 40 -foot setback for the eastern building. The Highway 10 DOD typically requires the placement of a 40 -foot rear yard building setback. 5. Side yard setbacks are typically required at 30 -feet. The western lot is indicated at 16.7 feet, as was previously approved. 6. The site plan indicates the drive extending to the northern property line. The previous approval did not include access to properties to the north. 7. Access drives should be designed and constructed as commercial streets limiting the number of access points. 8. Provide a note on the site plan indicating the dumpster screening. Will the hours of dumpster service be limited to daylight hours? If so provide a note indicating the hours of service. 9. The site plan indicates the western restaurant with drive-through service. Provide the location of the order board. Order boards are required to be screened. Provide the location of the screening wall and a note indicating the construction material. 10. Provide the days and hours of operation for the development. The previous approvals limited the hours to 6 am to midnight on the western lot and the eastern lot was approved limiting the hours of operation of a restaurant to 10 am to midnight. 11. The previous approval allowed a 4,500 square foot restaurant on the western lot and a maximum of 13,000 square feet of restaurant space on the eastern lot. The restaurant on the eastern lot was defined as a sit down restaurant. Item # 13. 12.The approval of the eastern lot allowed for C-3 uses excluding the following listed uses as allowable uses: Beverage shop, College dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, College, university or seminary, Convenience store with gas pumps, Convent or monastery, Day nursery or day care center, Day care center, adult, Establishment for the care of alcoholic, narcotic or psychiatric patients, Group care facility, Hospital, Hotel or motel, Laundromat or pick-up station, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi -family dwellings, Parking commercial lot or garage, Pawnshop, Private club with dining or bar service, School (business), School (commercial, trade or craft), School (public or denominational), Service station. Does the current approval limit the uses? 13. The approval of the western lot allowed for a restaurant use on the front lot and 0-3, General Office District uses on the rear lot. Will the uses be limited to the uses as previously approved? 14. Provide in the general notes section the maximum building height for the structures. 15. Provide details on the site plan for proposed signage including locations, total sign area and maximum height. Include a note concerning building signage including the location of proposed building signage. The Highway 10 DOD typically allows a development sign to be limited to a maximum height of ten feet and a maximum sign area of 100 square feet. Typically building signage is limited to a maximum of ten percent of the facade area of the facades fronting the roadways. 16. The site plan as proposed does not allow adequate stacking for the proposed drive- through facilities. 17. The parking lot layout on the rear eastern lot does not allow for proper turn -out along the eastern perimeter. Variance[Waivers: None requested. Public Works Conditions: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along Cantrell Road and both sides of the public access easement. 2. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of sixty (60) feet is required and street width of thirty-six (36) feet from back of curb to back of curb. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is required to be obtained for grading of lots without imminent construction. 5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). Item # 13. 8. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the intersection complies with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards. 9. In accordance with 31-210 (h)(12), access driveways running parallel to the street shall not create a four-way intersection within seventy-five (75) feet of the future curb line of the street. 10. What is the proposed plan for the continuance of the street north? Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Enter : No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. On- site private fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Little Rock Fire Department for more information. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express Route. Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use. The applicant has applied for a revised long form PCD to revise the plan layout, add a drive through restaurant and add a drive through bank. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell since it is a Principal Arterial. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Item # 13. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, but the plan does not address this issue. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's minimum landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. This development is located within the Arkansas Highway 10 Overlay District; therefore, must comply with the standards put forth in addition to the landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 3. This project was reviewed as a unitary development. 4. Berming is encouraged along Arkansas Highway 10. 5. The AR Highway 10 Overlay requires a twenty-five foot (25') wide landscape strip around the sites entirety; minus adjoining properties of the same ownership. In this instance the minimum amount shall be nine foot (9') on EACH lot or parcel. Currently, this site plan is not meeting this minimum requirement. 6. Interior islands must be a minimum of three hundred (300) square foot in area to qualify towards the minimum landscape ordinance requirements. 7. The area along the northern property line is zoned residential; therefore, a land use buffer of thirty-eight foot (38') is required. Seventy (70%) percent of this area is to remain undisturbed. 8. The property to the north is zoned residential, therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. 9. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 11. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat/plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, December 5, 2007. Item # 13.